Posted 4 years ago on May 19, 2012, 1:38 p.m. EST by TrevorMnemonic
(5827)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

And they're saying the same thing.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

Same thing

"The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. ... for the sake of protecting our friends and allies, the United States will lead a mighty coalition of freedom-loving nations and disarm Saddam Hussein." George W Bush

Same thing

President Obama stated on January 24, 2012, "Let there be no doubt: America is determined to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and I will take no options off the table to achieve that goal."

Same thing

U.S. policy toward Iran must begin with an understanding on Iran’s part that a military option to deal with their nuclear program remains on the table. - Mitt Romney

Congress budgets for war in Iran in NDAA of 2013 - "(b) Declaration of Policy- It shall be the policy of the United States to take all necessary measures, including military action if required, to prevent Iran from threatening the United States, its allies, or Iran's neighbors with a nuclear weapon."

32 Comments

All political issues seem to come down to fear and greed. Social programs, military build ups, they are all sold to us based on fear and/or greed. Look at health care. Insurance only works because most of us don't need it. Yet we're both made afraid not to have it and told how much "free" care will get by buying it.

I don't speak for this movement, only my own ideas about it, but I think OWS is a transformative movement and you just clarified in my mind that maybe one of the things OWS should focus on is this very broad idea of moving our society away from being "fear based" toward a much more "love based" society. Sounds crazy, but it would be pivotal to creating a better world for us all.

Fear always seems to be the default position for any movement, fearing ALEC, the Koch brothers, bankers, CEOs. Getting into love and brotherhood is always seen as religion. It couldn't hurt in a movement, but if I'm practical, I know it isn't going to happen.

We can love the Koch brothers and ALEC in a way that shows compassion to try to help them understand how harmful they are being to society. That would be the most effective way to go about changing them. Rising up in a sea of love like people did for Trayvon Martin.

Love can be great, it doesn't necessarily change anything. I like the idea of truth and working calmly toward a goal. As for Trayvon Martin? What a mess that is turning out to be. The rising up for him is beginning to look like it caused the DA to overcharge and Zimmerman could easily get off because of it. I'm not sure the kind of massive "we want action now" emotion that rose up is anything close to love or at all useful when it comes to the law.

Well, ALEC has backed down regarding instituting any further "social" laws as far as I know. That would be a very positive thing to come out of it. And, regardless of the outcome, it is never wrong to stand up for what is right.

I'm being blocked from getting access to this page through a google link

here's the summery on the lies we choose to believe to go to war

Forum Post: Congressman promotes resolution to stop gross abuse ...
occupywallst.org/.../congressman-promotes-resolution-to-stop-gross-...
9 posts - 7 authors - 6 days ago
7 comments 2 hours ago by MattLHolck ..... congress near unanimously voted to go to war with Iraq. which the UN assured several time did not have any weapons of mass ... have begun to resemble obscene brothel displays where voters pick ... we now know were fictitious-- weapons of mass destruction.

Iran? Afghanistan? Libya? All the countries getting bombed that we're not at "war" with?

Same reasons as Iraq. Tyrant leader or WMD's. Very similar justifications.

Democrats like Dennis Kucinich are not warmongering. But there's a big difference in the type of democrat when you compare Kucinich with an Obama or a Biden or a Hillary. Big difference is how they voted on Wall Street deregulation and the patriot act. The other is about whether or not they should bomb countries.

And of course I don't want to take any blame away from the warmongering repubs. Those guys are much more blatant about it.

Saddam had them but the UN screwed the whoe inspection process up and the man UN advisor in charge of the inspections basically became friends with Saddam and he had enough time to get rid of them. Iran will probably get a nuke and sell it to a terrorist cell so they can use it. If you don't think they are a threat than ou are an idiot. It is possible to live in peace without countries headed by radical Islamic extremists which is what Iran is. They are a serious threat.

Iran is less an enemy and threat to the United States than the United States is an enemy and threat to Iran. I imagine many Muslims consider the United States an unreasonable and implacable foe bent on destroying Islam.

The government needs to focus on new technology and find a way to surpass oil so this shit doesn't even matter. If they only spent as much money on that as they do on these wars... maybe. Think about it.

The world runs on oil .Green technology is worthless. Obama and his greenies want the world off of oil to save the planet. The planet is just fine, these green business are just a method to seperate you from your money and freedom ,and give that money to Obama's friends. Green technology , global warming , climate change ,all part of the new religion of guilt. The USA has vast resources of oil, coal and natural gas.